Inter-Agency Real Time Evaluation of the Humanitarian ... - alnap

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Annex 5 Interview Guide IA‐RTE Interview Guide – Pakistan Floods Overall questions: 1‐ How adequate was the response as a whole? As the crisis unfolded (At the start and over the following months?) 2‐ What operational results as well as positive and negative outcomes for the affected population did it produce? Context: What is the political dimension of the floods‐emergency? How would you describe the disaster? What are the key characteristics of the disaster? A – Questions for Organizations (international or national) 1‐ What needs assessments did you undertake for your current work? a. How did you conduct needs assessment (method, timing, single or joint)? b. Who did you assess? (Groups, gender, age, etc.)? c. Who was consulted? (Women, leaders, beneficiaries, etc)? d. What did you learn from the assessments? e. Were political dimension considered during assessments (exclusion, inclusion, etc.)? 2‐ What were the needs best met/least met (by cluster, by group, area) over time? 3‐ What was the timeline of your response (assessment, resource mobilisation, planning, procurement and implementation)? a. Where there any elements that led to delays or that expedited things? 4‐ Was funding timely and adapted to changing needs? a. Were the appeals realistic and timely (amount of funding requested)? b. Did appeals reflect the needs identified? c. Was there enough funding? 126 | P age
d. Describe inter‐linkages between different appeals? e. Did your organisation have the capacity to respond to more affected people if more money? f. What are the key issues/constraints in receiving and disbursing funds? g. What oversight bodies have been activated? How are they performing? 5‐ Successes and constraints in the overall response (security, access, infrastructure, procedures, etc.)? a. Who responded first (relief and recovery)? Why? b. What has your agency achieved during the current response (to floods)? c. Have all affected groups received assistance (coverage)? If no – who have not received and why? d. Have the affected population been informed about the assistance they will receive or not receive (accountability)? e. Was it necessary to prioritise assistance? What was prioritised? f. Is there general agreement on what delivery standards should apply in your cluster? g. How far has the response been tailored to meet needs? h. What were the main gaps between needs and response? i. Are there any outstandinggaps in the response? j. How has the political dimension affected the overall response? k. Was the response adhering to the fundamental Humanitarian Principles of Impartiality, Neutrality, and Independence? l. Do you have free Access to the affected populations m. What systems are in place for cash distribution? Are they successful? If any, what are the key issues/impediments? 6‐ When was coordination mechanisms established? By whom? a. How well is coordination working (sector/cluster, location, function – avoiding gaps /duplication, standardisation, resource mobilisation, leadership)? 127 | P age
Page 1 and 2:
Inter‐Agency Real Time Evaluation
Page 3 and 4:
Annex 4.1 Group meetings with the a
Page 5 and 6:
Conclusions and recommendations bas
Page 7 and 8:
Area Finding Conclusion Recommendat
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15:
Page 18 and 19:
IA RTE of the humanitarian response
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
7.2 Monitoring IA RTE of the humani
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
9 ‐ Annexes Annex 1: Terms of Ref
Page 64 and 65:
4. METHODOLOGY IA RTE of the humani
Page 66 and 67:
The ‘IA RTE Framework’ as Diagr
Page 68 and 69:
Needs IA RTE EVALUATION FRAMEWORK D
Page 70 and 71:
Access, Principles, Advocacy IA RTE
Page 72 and 73:
M&E IA RTE EVALUATION FRAMEWORK Dim
Page 74 and 75:
IA RTE EVALUATION FRAMEWORK Dimensi
Page 76 and 77: IA RTE EVALUATION FRAMEWORK Dimensi
Page 78 and 79: � Have relevant, prioritized, inc
Page 80 and 81: Action, HAP 2007 Standard in Humani
Page 82 and 83: � Approves the final IA RTE repor
Page 84 and 85: (details see row below) � Sindh:
Page 86 and 87: words and a main text of no more th
Page 88 and 89: UNICEF United Nations Children Fund
Page 90 and 91: Baltistan and Pakistan‐Administer
Page 92 and 93: continues to impede returns. The ND
Page 94 and 95: Surname, Forenames Org. ♂♀ Meth
Page 110 and 111: Summary of interviews by category o
Page 112 and 113: 21. Ashfar Ahmad Save the Children
Page 114 and 115: 19. Farrusch Mirza UNICEF 20. Hamad
Page 116 and 117: 13 . Dube Alfred WHO 14 . Masooma H
Page 118 and 119: 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. Fareeha Ummar O
Page 120 and 121: Annex 4.3: Field Work Itenerary Dat
Page 122 and 123: Date Riccardo Polastro Nicolai Stee
Page 124 and 125: Date Riccardo Polastro Nicolai Stee
Page 128 and 129: . With whom (military, government,
Page 130 and 131: 6‐ Did the needs assessments take
Page 132 and 133: Millions 900,0 800,0 700,0 600,0 50
Page 134 and 135: Annex 7: Cluster Output Review Tabl
Page 136 and 137: Source: Logistics Cluster, Feb 2011
Page 138 and 139: Pakistan Initial Floods Emergency R
Page 140: Ms. Aatika Nagrah, a development pr
show all

Inter-Agency Real Time Evaluation of the Humanitarian ... - alnap

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?